One of the major problems encountered with oral devices is that, if uncomfortable, they will not be worn regularly by people who need their use. Therefore it is believed that the very large and cumbersome arrangements shown in the other cited prior art is unlikely to be generally acceptable except in cases where patients are in most serious need of medical assistance.
For example, one would expect wearer resistance to devices such as Messine, U.S. Pat. No. 2,505,056, or Johnston, U.S. Pat. No. 2,528,370, on the grounds that discomfort is caused by some distortion or restriction of the jaw, and could result in loss of sleep. The H section device of Samelson, U.S. Pat. No. 4,304,227 and 4,169,473 would no doubt be effective, but is very bulky and can restrict free movement of the tongue.
One object of this invention is to provide a snore inhibiting device which is unlikely to be dislodged during sleep, and another object is to provide a device which, although comfortable, will very effectively restrict the flow of air into the mouth when used by a user, thereby causing the flow of air to the lungs to pass solely through the nose.